Godines

Godines v. Ashcroft

Good Law
103 F. App'x 293
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJuly 19, 2004No. 02-72962California265 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Jesus Godines and Maria Munoz, husband and wife, natives and citizens of Mexico, petition for review of the decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) affirming without opinion the immigration judge’s denial of their applications for asylum and withholding of removal and Go-dines’ application for cancellation of removal. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252 , and we deny the petition.

Petitioners contend that no asylum or cancellation of removal case could ever properly be streamlined by the BIA under 8 C.F.R. § 1003.1 (a)(7) because such cases invariably involve a “novel fact situation.” We reject this contention because not every fact based case is “novel in the eyes of the law.” See Falcon Carriche v. Ashcroft, 350 F.3d 845, 852 (9th Cir.2003).

Petitioners’ contention that the BIA’s streamlining regulations violate due process is foreclosed by Falcon Carriche, 350 F.3d at 849-52 (holding that the BIA’s streamlining procedure does not violate an alien’s due process rights).

Pursuant to Desta v. Ashcroft, 365 F.3d 741 (9th Cir.2004), petitioners’ motion for stay of removal included a timely request for stay of voluntary departure. Because…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.